Rugby Laws Require Early Approval

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28552, 3 April 1958, Page 15

Rugby Laws Require Early Approval

yyiTH the opening matches in the Canterbury Rugby Union’s competitions less than three weeks away, players in Canterbury. and no doubt throughout the rest of New Zealand. are seriously concerned at the delay in announcing the final decision on the recently amended laws of the game. These laws, brought in at the meeting of the International Rugby Board in January, have not yet received the official sanction of the New Zealand union and they are unlikely to until referees have an opportunity of discussing them and fixing interpretations for them. This will be completed during Easter when referees from all parts of New Zealand will gather in Christchurch for their annual conference. The conference is set down to begin tomorrow, the first day to be given up exclusively to a discussion on the rules. Same Procedure This is the procedure that has been followed in previous years Whether it is the best course to pursue to secure uniformity is questionable. What does seem wrong is that the thousands of Rugby players in New Zealand should have to wait nearly three months to hear how the rules will affect them. After the meeting of New Zealand referees, the interpretation of the new laws in New Zealand will have been decided. It is extremely unlikely that the local interpretations will conform entirely with interpretations in other Rugby countries. It is here that the system falls down. "because of the present system of allowing each country to place its interpretations on the laws, the problem always arises during visits of overseas teams of having to explain interpretations to the visitors. Few international sides complete tours without some reference being made to the varying interpretations of the laws. The 1956 tour of New Zealand by the Springboks and the 1958 tour of the British Isles by the Wallabies are two instances. How much better would it be if. <>t the end of the International

Rugby Board’s conference on laws, referees from all Rugby nations of the world conferred as a body and brought down one set of interpretations for all laws to be acted upon by all countries. There seems little reason why such a meeting should not take place at the end of each conference on laws. There seems little reason, also, why referees should not attend the board.’s conference on laws. This is not only logical, but very necessary. They are the men who administer the laws. They should have some say in how they should be drafted.

An international referees’ conference to consider new amendments to laws would obviate the necessity for a conference of the kind that will be held in Christchurch for the next few days. It would also ease the burden on club coaches and officials, whose complaints about the delay in reaching some decision on the laws are fully justified.